Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

94. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the exploratory discussions on public service pay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29645/22]

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

97. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his views on his Department’s engagement with the representatives of an organisation (details supplied) regarding public sector pay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30552/22]

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not mind how the questions are grouped. I was listening to the discussion earlier and I wish the Minister and his Department well in these talks. I wish to examine a particular angle. Is any work being done in respect of sectoral-specific challenges within the public service, where vacancies cannot be filled? For example, is there any focus on vacancies in health and disability services? Those vacancies are causing major deficiencies in the delivery of public services. We cannot currently fill them because of pay and also because of other issues, and I believe this provides the opportunity to do that.

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 94 and 97 together.

The Deputy made a very good point. In the current agreement we provided for a sectoral bargaining fund. For example, on 1 February there was the option of taking the flat 1% increase or putting that into a sectoral bargaining fund. The public service was divided up into a large number of sectoral bargaining units and there have been examples where that fund was used to address specific targeted issues in individual sectors. There are still some ongoing negotiations, for example, in health, where it has not been fully settled. I have no doubt that the outstanding issues will form part of the discussions that are currently under way at the WRC.

The question of whether we have a mechanism in the future for addressing sector-specific issues is one that is under consideration at the talks.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that. The Minister knows himself, for instance in health, that there are so many challenges in filling vacancies in the therapies and for consultants and nurses, in particular advanced nurse practitioners, all of which would make a significant difference to the delivery of services. Similarly, vacancies cannot be filled across the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, and educational psychology services that we will talk about later. Pay is an issue, in particular compared to that in the private sector, but there are many other issues as well, especially when we dive into the conditions of work within the HSE, for instance, and in hospital groups, which seem to put people off applying to work in the public service. All that means is that we are not delivering proper public services. The Minister is investing significantly in public services, but we are not seeing the benefit of the investment on the ground. In particular, parents of children with additional needs are not seeing that investment. People on waiting lists are not seeing the investment because of our inability to fill vacancies. We have a short window in the context of the public service pay talks to address that.

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are a significant number of vacancies across the system, in particular in healthcare. Recruitment is too slow. That is definitely having an impact on service delivery and we need to address that. In addition to having a mechanism where we agree general round increases, the Deputy raised the specific point about individual sectors. Of course, there is always the potential knock-on consequence of relativities. Different groups will examine how other groups fare in discussions on public service pay. I am aware of recommendations that the Public Service Pay Commission has made about this particular issue, and having a mechanism to address outstanding matters. We endeavour to do that in the sectoral bargaining fund, with some if not complete success, and the issue of addressing pay at a sectoral level is one that is under consideration in the course of the talks currently under way.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like my colleague, Deputy Calleary, I want to focus my attention on the consequences of the public service pay talks in the context of a cost-of-living crisis. Where we would like to see the Government head with these talks is towards targeted measures at lower-income public servants, the threshold for which I will allow the Department and others to decide. If we are to be realistic about the effect of public service pay increases at this time, we need to target them at those who need it most, as opposed to those in the upper echelons of the public service. I believe there is opportunity.

The cost-of-living crisis has had a profound effect on the entire economy and if the Government is to respond appropriately to that in addition to the substantial measures that have been introduced, we should target the public sector pay talks at lower-income individuals because it cannot be done in isolation.

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy very much for raising that point. It is a principle that we embedded in the current agreement, Building Momentum, that for each general round increase, a floor was set so that the benefit should be at least €500, even though it was to be 1% overall. If that 1% resulted in less than €500 for individual workers, then they would be given €500 in the general round. The percentage increase for them was greater than for workers generally under the public service pay agreement. That is a principle that we adopted in the current agreement and will again be considered in the context of the current negotiations. Some of the other measures in the existing agreement do favour lower- and middle-income workers in particular in terms of overtime rates, twilight payments and so on. Those in trades and with technical skills in particular benefited more under the existing agreement than people on higher flat salaries, for example.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the whole area of relativities is embedded in the concept of a lot of these talks, but if relativities and the need to restrict their effect is impacting on the delivery of public services, is there an argument to be made for some measure to be put in place to balance the need to deliver to people on waiting lists and parents of children with additional needs? There is a need to make a difference to citizens' lives and some balance must be given to that in regard to the whole area of relativities.

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Of course. At the end of the day, we provide public services with a view to them reaching where they are needed and that citizens receive services. That is ultimately what having a public service pay deal or a fit-for-purpose public service is all about. We do need to have accountability, so that where public money is being provided through Votes in this Oireachtas, that it is used for the purpose for which it is intended.

Deputy Calleary's specific point about ensuring there is a mechanism to address particular pay issues so that recruitment can be successful is a fair one, which we will take on board. I acknowledge his consistent work in advocating in the area of disability services and special needs, in particular, and highlighting the deficiencies that exist in the provision of services currently. I assure him that it is a priority for the Government. I will ensure that the pay deal will not provide any barrier to addressing them by means of recruitment of the people we need.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My focus is similar to that of my colleague. What level of consideration does the Department give, in the context of the public service pay deal, and with the backdrop of the various tax measures that may be implemented in the October budget? As Deputy Calleary correctly pointed out, the difficulties in recruitment at certain grades and levels within the public service right across the board are of real concern. Many cite pay as the primary reason for not taking up posts. To be sector-specific, in the context of the Defence Forces, in particular at entry level, that is clearly an issue as well. Could the Minister please comment on that?

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think it is about a blend of measures. As I stated earlier, it is not solely down to pay to address cost-of-living pressures that undoubtedly exist. The Government has other levers. We have used some of them to date in the exceptional measures that have been introduced outside of the normal budgetary calendar. It is open to the Government to use some of those in the context of the budget as well. The cost of living can be addressed in a number of ways. Pay is one and obviously social welfare measures, and other targeted measures such as reductions in costs people face in accessing public services. The reduction in public transport fares was a very progressive and important move in that regard, in addition to taxation measures as well.